<!--
Thank you for contributing to Ruff/ty! To help us out with reviewing,
please consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title? (Please prefix
with `[ty]` for ty pull
requests.)
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
Part of #18972
This PR makes [indentation-with-invalid-multiple-comment
(E114)](https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/indentation-with-invalid-multiple-comment/#indentation-with-invalid-multiple-comment-e114)'s
example not raise a syntax error by adding a 4 space indented `...`. The
example still gave `E114` without this, but adding the `...` both makes
the change in indentation of the comment clearer, and makes it not give
a `SyntaxError`.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
N/A, no functionality/tests affected
## Summary
Follow-up to #16035.
`check_docs_formatted.py` will now report backtick-quoted shortcut links
in rule documentation. It uses a regular expression to find them. Such a
link:
* Starts with `[`, followed by <code>\`</code>, then a "name" sequence
of at least one non-backtick non-newline character, followed by another
<code>\`</code>, then ends with `]`.
* Is not followed by either a `[` or a `(`.
* Is not placed within a code block.
If the name is a known Ruff option name, that link is not considered a
violation.
## Test Plan
Manual.
## Summary
Resolves#12321.
The physical-line-based `RUF054` checks for form feed characters that
are preceded by only tabs and spaces, but not any other characters,
including form feeds.
## Test Plan
`cargo nextest run` and `cargo insta test`.
## Summary
Now that Ruff provides a formatter, there is no need to rely on Black to
check that the docs are formatted correctly in
`check_docs_formatted.py`. This PR swaps out Black for the Ruff
formatter and updates inconsistencies between the two.
This PR will be a precursor to another PR
([branch](https://github.com/calumy/ruff/tree/format-pyi-in-docs)),
updating the `check_docs_formatted.py` script to check for pyi files,
fixing #11568.
## Test Plan
- CI to check that the docs are formatted correctly using the updated
script.
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
This is the implementation for the new rule of `pycodestyle (E204)`. It
follows the guidlines described in the contributing site, and as such it
has a new file named `whitespace_after_decorator.rs`, a new test file
called `E204.py`, and as such invokes the `function` in the `AST
statement checker` for functions and functions in classes. Linking #2402
because it has all the pycodestyle rules.
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
The file E204.py, has a `decorator` defined called wrapper, and this
decorator is used for 2 cases. The first one is when a `function` which
has a `decorator` is called in the file, and the second one is when
there is a `class` and 2 `methods` are defined for the `class` with a
`decorator` attached it.
Test file:
``` python
def foo(fun):
def wrapper():
print('before')
fun()
print('after')
return wrapper
# No error
@foo
def bar():
print('bar')
# E204
@ foo
def baz():
print('baz')
class Test:
# No error
@foo
def bar(self):
print('bar')
# E204
@ foo
def baz(self):
print('baz')
```
I am still new to rust and any suggestion is appreciated. Specially with
the way im using native ruff utilities.
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
Addresses this comment:
https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/11357#issuecomment-2104714029
## Summary
The docs for F541 did not mention some surprising, but WAI, behavior
regarding implicit string concatenation. Update the docs to describe the
behavior.
Here's how things rendered for me locally:
When using the autofixer for `Q000` it does not remove the backslashes
from quotes that no longer need escaping.
This new rule checks for such backslashes (regardless whether they come
from the autofixer or not) and can remove them.
fixes#8617
## Summary
The markdown documentation was present, but in the wrong place, so was
not displaying on the website. I moved it and added some references.
Related to #2646.
## Test Plan
`python scripts/check_docs_formatted.py`
## Summary
Fix CI (broken in #7496).
The code snippet was formatted as Black would format a stub file, but
the CI script doesn't know that (it assumes all code snippets are
non-stub files). Easier to ignore.
Sorry for breaking CI!
## Test Plan
`python scripts/check_docs_formatted.py`
Adds rule to convert type aliases defined with annotations i.e. `x:
TypeAlias = int` to the new PEP-695 syntax e.g. `type x = int`.
Does not support using new generic syntax for type variables, will be
addressed in a follow-up.
Added as part of pyupgrade — ~the code 100 as chosen to avoid collision
with real pyupgrade codes~.
Part of #4617
Builds on #5062
## Summary
This PR implements pycodestyle's E241 (tab after comma) and E242
(multiple whitespace after comma) lints.
These are marked as nursery rules like many other pycodestyle rules.
Refs #2402
## Test Plan
E24.py copied from pycodestyle.
**Summary**
Updated doc comments for `missing_whitespace_around_operator.rs`. Online
docs also benefit from this update.
**Test Plan**
Checked docs via
[mkdocs](389fe13c93/CONTRIBUTING.md (L267-L296))
## Summary
This is an error message only change to lead an implementor of a new
rule that has an unformatted or invalid bad example to the
right code.
## Test Plan
n/a
## Summary
Updated doc comment for `tab_indentation.rs`. Online docs also benefit
from this update.
## Test Plan
Checked docs via
[mkdocs](389fe13c93/CONTRIBUTING.md (L267-L296))
## Summary
Adds `PERF401` and `PERF402` mirroring `W8401` and `W8402` from
https://github.com/tonybaloney/perflint
Implementation is not super smart but should be at parity with upstream
implementation judging by:
c07391c176/perflint/comprehension_checker.py (L42-L73)
It essentially checks:
- If the body of a for-loop is just one statement
- If that statement is an `if` and the if-statement contains a call to
`append()` we flag `PERF401` and suggest a list comprehension
- If that statement is a plain call to `append()` or `insert()` we flag
`PERF402` and suggest `list()` or `list.copy()`
I've set the violation to only flag the first append call in a long
`if-else` statement for `PERF401`. Happy to change this to some other
location or make it multiple violations if that makes more sense.
## Test Plan
Fixtures were added with the relevant scenarios for both rules
## Issue Links
Refers: https://github.com/astral-sh/ruff/issues/4789
## Summary
Add documentation to the `D3XX` rules that check for issues with
docstring quotes. Related to #2646.
## Test Plan
`python scripts/check_docs_formatted.py`
